Senate Bill S10731

                             
                     S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
                                   10731
 
                             I N  S E N A T E
 
                             October 28, 2026
                                ___________
 
 Introduced  by  Sens. GOUNARDES, FAHY -- read twice and ordered printed,
   and when printed to be committed to the Committee on Rules
 
 AN ACT to amend the general business law, in relation to the responsible
   AI safety and education (RAISE) act
 
   THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
 BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

   Section 1. Section 1420 of the general business law, as added by chap-
 ter 96 of the laws of 2026,  is amended to read as follows:
   §  1420.  Definitions.  As  used  in this article, the following terms
 shall have the following meanings:
   1. "Affiliate" means a person controlling,  controlled  by,  or  under
 common  control with a specified person, directly or indirectly, through
 one or more intermediaries.
   2. "Artificial intelligence model" means  an  engineered  or  machine-
 based  system  that  varies  in  its level of autonomy and that can, for
 explicit or implicit objectives, infer from the input it receives how to
 generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.
   3. (a) "Catastrophic risk" means a foreseeable and material risk  that
 a  frontier  developer's  development,  storage, use, or deployment of a
 frontier model will materially contribute to the death  of,  or  serious
 injury  to,  more  than fifty people or more than one billion dollars in
 damage to, or loss of, property arising from a single incident OR MULTI-
 PLE INCIDENTS involving a frontier model doing any of the following:
   (i) providing expert-level assistance in the creation or release of  a
 chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapon;
   (ii) engaging in conduct with [no meaningful] LIMITED human oversight,
 intervention,  or  supervision  that  is either a cyberattack or, if the
 conduct had been committed by a human, would  constitute  the  crime  of
 murder, assault, extortion, or theft, including theft by false pretense;
 [or]
   (iii)  ATTEMPTING TO OVERTHROW OR SEIZE CONTROL OF THE FEDERAL GOVERN-
 MENT OR STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK; OR
   (IV) evading the control of its frontier developer or user.
 
  EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                       [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                            LBD16516-01-6
              

 S. 10731                            2
 
   (b) "Catastrophic risk" does not include a  foreseeable  and  material
 risk from any of the following:
   (i)  information  that  a frontier model outputs if the information is
 otherwise publicly accessible in a substantially  similar  form  from  a
 source other than a foundation model;
   (ii) lawful activity of the federal government; or
   (iii)  harm caused by a frontier model in combination with other soft-
 ware if the frontier model did not materially contribute to the harm.
   4. "COVERED EMERGENCY"  MEANS  A  SITUATION  THAT  POSES  AN  IMMINENT
 CATASTROPHIC  RISK  OR  SECURITY  RISK.  "COVERED  EMERGENCY"  SHALL  BE
 CONSTRUED TO INCLUDE A SITUATION IN WHICH IMMEDIATE ACTION IS  NECESSARY
 TO  PREVENT  A CATASTROPHIC RISK OR SECURITY RISK, EVEN IF THE HARM THAT
 WOULD BE PREVENTED IS NOT PROXIMATE IN TIME TO THE SITUATION.
   5. "Critical safety incident" means any of the following:
   (a) unauthorized access to, modification of, or exfiltration of[, the]
 UNRELEASED model weights of a frontier model [that results in  death  or
 bodily injury];
   (b) harm resulting from the materialization of a catastrophic risk;
   (c) [loss of control of a frontier model causing death or bodily inju-
 ry; or
   (d)  a frontier model that uses deceptive techniques against the fron-
 tier developer to subvert the controls or  monitoring  of  its  frontier
 developer  outside  of  the  context of an evaluation designed to elicit
 this behavior and in a manner  that  demonstrates  materially  increased
 catastrophic risk] CONDUCT BY A FOUNDATION MODEL OF A FRONTIER DEVELOPER
 THAT  CIRCUMVENTS, DISABLES, EVADES, OR ATTEMPTS TO CIRCUMVENT, DISABLE,
 OR EVADE, A MATERIAL, TECHNICAL OR ORGANIZATIONAL CONTROL OF  ITS  FRON-
 TIER  DEVELOPER THAT LIMITS THE MODEL'S ACCESS TO SYSTEMS, RESOURCES, OR
 DATA, PROVIDES FOR ITS  SUSPENSION  OR  MODIFICATION,  OR  MONITORS  ITS
 CONDUCT  OR  CAPABILITIES,  OUTSIDE  OF  THE  CONTEXT  OF  AN EVALUATION
 DESIGNED TO ELICIT SUCH CONDUCT WHERE SUCH CONDUCT REMAINS  CONFINED  TO
 THE EVALUATION ENVIRONMENT;
   (D)  CONDUCT BY A FRONTIER MODEL THAT, WITHOUT THE INTENT OF ANY USER,
 MATERIALLY IMPAIRS THE CONFIDENTIALITY, INTEGRITY, OR AVAILABILITY OF  A
 COMPUTER  SYSTEM  OR  COMPUTER NETWORK WHICH IS NOT OWNED OR OPERATED BY
 THE FRONTIER DEVELOPER OR USER AND WHERE SUCH CONDUCT OCCURS WITHOUT THE
 CONSENT OF THE OWNER OR OPERATOR OF SUCH SYSTEM OR NETWORK;
   (E) AN OCCURRENCE IN WHICH A SAFEGUARD AGAINST AN  INCIDENT  DESCRIBED
 IN   THIS  SUBDIVISION  FAILED,  WAS  CIRCUMVENTED,  OR  WAS  MATERIALLY
 DEGRADED, SUCH THAT, ABSENT TIMELY INTERVENTION, MITIGATION, OR  FORTUI-
 TY, THERE WAS A SUBSTANTIAL LIKELIHOOD THAT SUCH A CRITICAL SAFETY INCI-
 DENT WOULD HAVE RESULTED; OR
   (F)  ANY OTHER OCCURRENCE OR CONDITION DESIGNATED BY REGULATION OF THE
 OFFICE WHICH IS RELATED TO CATASTROPHIC  RISK,  SECURITY  RISK,  OR  THE
 AUTOMATION OF AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
   6. "DEPARTMENT" MEANS THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES.
   [5.]  7.  (a)  "Deploy"  means to make a frontier model available to a
 third party for use, modification, copying, or  combination  with  other
 software.
   (b)  "Deploy"  does not include making a frontier model available to a
 third party for the primary purpose  of  developing  or  evaluating  the
 frontier model.
   [6.] 8. "Foundation model" means an artificial intelligence model that
 is all of the following:
   (a) trained on a broad data set;
   (b) designed for generality of output; and
 S. 10731                            3
 
   (c) adaptable to a wide range of distinctive tasks.
   [7.]  9. "Frontier AI framework" means documented technical and organ-
 izational protocols to:
   (A) manage, assess, and mitigate catastrophic risks; AND
   (B) ASSESS THE ABILITY OF FRONTIER MODELS TO AUTOMATE AI RESEARCH  AND
 DEVELOPMENT  AND  TO  MANAGE  ANY  CATASTROPHIC RISKS AND SECURITY RISKS
 ASSOCIATED WITH SUCH AUTOMATION.
   [8.] 10. "Frontier developer" means  a  person  who  has  trained,  or
 initiated  the  training of, a frontier model, with respect to which the
 person has used, or intends to use, at least as much computing power  to
 train  the  frontier  model  as  would meet the technical specifications
 found in subdivision [nine] TWELVE of this section.
   11. "FRONTIER EXAMINER" MEANS A THIRD  PARTY  THAT  PERFORMS  SERVICES
 UNDER  SECTION  FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY-FOUR OF THIS ARTICLE AND THAT IS
 ELIGIBLE TO BE A FRONTIER EXAMINER UNDER SUCH SECTION.
   [9.] 12. (a) "Frontier  model"  means  a  foundation  model  that  was
 trained  using  a  quantity  of  computing power greater than 10º[26] 25
 integer or floating-point operations, PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT FOUNDATION
 MODELS SHALL BE CONSIDERED TO BE  FRONTIER  MODELS  IF  THE  OFFICE  HAS
 DETERMINED THAT THE FOUNDATION MODEL:
   (I) IS AMONG THE MOST CAPABLE FOUNDATION MODELS;
   (II) POSSESSES CAPABILITIES WHICH POSE CATASTROPHIC RISK; AND
   (III)  IS  REASONABLY  LIKELY  TO  POSSESS  THE ABILITY TO AUTOMATE AI
 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
   (b) The quantity of computing power described in paragraph (a) of this
 subdivision shall include computing for the original  training  run  and
 for any subsequent fine-tuning, reinforcement learning, or other materi-
 al modifications the developer applies to a preceding foundation model.
   13.  "INTERNAL  USE" MEANS ANY USE OF A FRONTIER MODEL BY ITS FRONTIER
 DEVELOPER OR ITS AFFILIATES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY  OF  THE
 FOLLOWING:
   (A) THE TRAINING OF THE FRONTIER MODEL;
   (B) MODIFYING OR FINE-TUNING THE FRONTIER MODEL;
   (C) USING THE FRONTIER MODEL FOR INTERNAL BUSINESS PURPOSES;
   (D) EVALUATING THE FRONTIER MODEL; AND
   (E) USING THE FRONTIER MODEL FOR AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
   [10.]  14.  "Large frontier developer" means a frontier developer that
 together with its affiliates collectively [had annual gross revenues  in
 excess  of  five hundred million dollars in the preceding calendar year]
 INCURRED MORE THAN ONE BILLION DOLLARS  IN  EXPENDITURES  FOR  RESEARCH,
 DEVELOPMENT,  TRAINING, FINE-TUNING, MODIFICATION, SECURITY, EVALUATION,
 OR OTHER ACTIVITIES WHICH HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE DEVELOPMENT, CREATION,
 OR MODIFICATION OF ONE OR MORE FRONTIER MODELS IN THE PRECEDING  THIRTY-
 SIX MONTHS.
   [11.]  15.  "Model  weight"  means a numerical parameter in a frontier
 model that is adjusted through training and  that  helps  determine  how
 inputs are transformed into outputs.
   [12. "Department" means the department of financial services.
   13. "Property" means tangible or intangible property.
   14.  "Person"  means an individual, proprietorship, firm, partnership,
 joint venture, syndicate, business trust, company, corporation,  limited
 liability  company, association, committee, or any other nongovernmental
 organization or group of persons acting in concert.
   15.] 16. "OFFICE" MEANS AN OFFICE WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT  OF  FINANCIAL
 SERVICES, WHICH SHALL REPORT TO THE SUPERINTENDENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES
 AND IS TASKED WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS ARTICLE.
 S. 10731                            4
 
   17.  "OPEN SOURCE RELEASE" MEANS MAKING THE MODEL WEIGHTS OF A FOUNDA-
 TION MODEL PUBLICLY  AVAILABLE  UNDER  A  LICENSE  THAT  GRANTS  TO  ALL
 PERSONS,  WITHOUT PAYMENT OF A FEE OR ROYALTY AND WITHOUT RESTRICTION OR
 DISCRIMINATION BASED ON THE IDENTITY OF ANY PERSON OR GROUP  OF  PERSONS
 OR  ON  THE  FIELD  OF  ENDEAVOR, THE RIGHTS TO ACCESS, USE, MODIFY, AND
 REDISTRIBUTE THE FOUNDATION MODEL OR MODIFIED VERSIONS OF THE FOUNDATION
 MODEL. A LICENSE DOES  NOT  FAIL  TO  SATISFY  THIS  SUBDIVISION  SOLELY
 BECAUSE  IT  REQUIRES  ATTRIBUTION TO THE FRONTIER DEVELOPER OR REQUIRES
 THAT MODIFIED OR REDISTRIBUTED VERSIONS BE MADE AVAILABLE UNDER  IDENTI-
 CAL OR COMPARABLE TERMS.
   18. "PERSON" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL, PROPRIETORSHIP,  FIRM,  PARTNERSHIP,
 JOINT  VENTURE, SYNDICATE, BUSINESS TRUST, COMPANY, CORPORATION, LIMITED
 LIABILITY COMPANY, ASSOCIATION, COMMITTEE, OR ANY OTHER  NONGOVERNMENTAL
 ORGANIZATION OR GROUP OF PERSONS ACTING IN CONCERT.
   19. "PROPERTY" MEANS TANGIBLE OR INTANGIBLE PROPERTY.
   20. "RELEVANT INFORMATION" MEANS ALL INFORMATION REASONABLY  NECESSARY
 FOR  A FRONTIER EXAMINER TO COMPLY WITH SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY-
 FOUR OF THIS ARTICLE, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
   (A) ALL UNREDACTED VERSIONS OF MATERIALS PUBLISHED  PURSUANT  TO  THIS
 ARTICLE;
   (B)  ACCESS  TO FRONTIER MODELS SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE ASSESSMENTS UNDER
 SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY-FOUR OF THIS ARTICLE;
   (C) INTERVIEWS WITH EMPLOYEES OF A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER;
   (D) INTERNAL DOCUMENTS OF A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER; AND
   (E) INFORMATION TO WHICH AN EMPLOYEE OF  A  LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER
 WHOSE  RESPONSIBILITIES  INCLUDE  ASSESSING THE CAPABILITIES OF FRONTIER
 MODELS OR MANAGING CATASTROPHIC RISK OR SECURITY RISK HAS ACCESS IN  THE
 ORDINARY  COURSE  OF EMPLOYMENT IS RELEVANT INFORMATION UNLESS THE LARGE
 FRONTIER DEVELOPER ESTABLISHES THAT IT IS NOT REASONABLY  NECESSARY  FOR
 THE  FRONTIER  EXAMINER  TO PERFORM ITS FUNCTIONS UNDER SECTION FOURTEEN
 HUNDRED TWENTY-FOUR OF THIS ARTICLE.
   21. "SPECIFICATION" MEANS A HIGH-LEVEL,  GENERAL  DESCRIPTION  OF  THE
 PRINCIPLES  THAT  THE  MODEL  IS  INTENDED  TO  FOLLOW, HOW THE MODEL IS
 INTENDED TO PRIORITIZE DIFFERENT PRINCIPLES AND USER  PROMPTS,  AND  THE
 TOPICS FOR WHICH THE MODEL IS INTENDED TO REFUSE, REDIRECT, OR OTHERWISE
 SUBVERT USER PROMPTS.
   22. "SECURITY RISK" MEANS A FORESEEABLE AND MATERIAL RISK OF UNAUTHOR-
 IZED  ACCESS  TO,  MODIFICATION  OF, OR TRANSFER OF THE UNRELEASED MODEL
 WEIGHTS OF A FRONTIER MODEL BY ANY PERSON, ENTITY, OR MODEL.
   23. "Superintendent" means the superintendent of financial services.
   [16. "Office" means an  office  within  the  department  of  financial
 services, which shall report to the superintendent of financial services
 and is tasked with implementation of this article.]
   §  2. Section 1421 of the general business law, as added by chapter 96
 of the laws of 2026, is amended to read as follows:
   § 1421. Transparency requirements. 1. A large frontier developer shall
 write, implement, comply with, and clearly and conspicuously publish  on
 its  internet  website a frontier AI framework that applies to the large
 frontier developer's frontier models and describes  in  detail  how  the
 large frontier developer handles all of the following:
   (a)  incorporating  national  standards,  international standards, and
 industry consensus best practices into its frontier AI framework;
   (b) defining and assessing  thresholds  used  by  the  large  frontier
 developer  to identify and assess whether a frontier model has capabili-
 ties that could pose a catastrophic risk OR A SECURITY RISK OR WHETHER A
 S. 10731                            5
 
 FRONTIER MODEL HAS THE CAPABILITY TO AUTOMATE AI RESEARCH  AND  DEVELOP-
 MENT, which may include multiple-tiered thresholds;
   (c)  applying mitigations to address the potential for catastrophic OR
 SECURITY risks based on the results of assessments  undertaken  pursuant
 to paragraph (b) of this subdivision;
   (d)  reviewing  assessments and adequacy of mitigations as part of the
 decision to deploy a frontier model or use it [extensively] internally;
   (e) [using third parties to  assess  the  potential  for  catastrophic
 risks and the effectiveness of mitigations of catastrophic risks;
   (f)]  revisiting and updating the frontier AI framework, including any
 criteria that trigger updates  and  how  the  large  frontier  developer
 determines when its frontier models are substantially modified enough to
 require  disclosures  pursuant  to  subdivision  [three]  FOUR  of  this
 section;
   [(g)] (F) cybersecurity AND INFORMATION SECURITY practices to  [secure
 unreleased  model  weights from unauthorized modification or transfer by
 internal or external parties]  MITIGATE  SECURITY  RISKS  BASED  ON  THE
 RESULTS  OF  ASSESSMENTS  UNDERTAKEN  PURSUANT  TO PARAGRAPH (B) OF THIS
 SUBDIVISION;
   [(h)] (G) identifying and responding to critical safety incidents;
   [(i)] (H) instituting internal governance practices to  ensure  imple-
 mentation of [these processes] THE FRONTIER AI FRAMEWORKS; [and
   (j)]  (I)  assessing and managing catastrophic risk resulting from the
 internal use of its frontier models, including risks  resulting  from  a
 frontier  model  circumventing oversight mechanisms AND RISKS RELATED TO
 THE FRONTIER MODEL BEING USED TO AUTOMATE AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT;
   (J) ASSESSING FRONTIER MODELS FOR SIGNS OF EXPLOITING, UNDERMINING, OR
 EVADING THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S TRAINING,  ASSESSMENT,  OR  MITI-
 GATION PROCESSES OR FOR DECEPTIVE OR MANIPULATIVE BEHAVIOR; AND
   (K)  WHETHER AND HOW THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER USES FRONTIER MODELS
 TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE OTHER FRONTIER MODELS.
   2. THE OFFICE MAY ADOPT REGULATIONS TO ADD ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS THAT  A
 LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER  IS  REQUIRED  TO  INCLUDE IN ITS FRONTIER AI
 FRAMEWORK TO ACCOUNT FOR CHANGES  IN  THE  SCIENTIFIC  UNDERSTANDING  OF
 CATASTROPHIC  RISK, CHANGES IN AI CAPABILITIES OR MITIGATION APPROACHES,
 OR TO ADD ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS THAT WOULD EFFECTUATE THE PURPOSES OF THIS
 CHAPTER.
   3. (a) A large frontier developer shall review  and,  as  appropriate,
 update its frontier AI framework at least once per year.
   (b) If a large frontier developer makes a material modification to its
 frontier  AI  framework,  the large frontier developer shall clearly and
 conspicuously publish the modified frontier AI framework  and  a  justi-
 fication for that modification within thirty days.
   [3.]  4.  (a)  Before,  or concurrently with, deploying a new frontier
 model or a substantially modified version of an existing frontier model,
 a frontier developer shall clearly  and  conspicuously  publish  on  its
 internet website a transparency report containing all of the following:
   (i) the internet website of the frontier developer;
   (ii) a mechanism that enables a natural person to communicate with the
 frontier developer;
   (iii) the release date of the frontier model;
   (iv) the languages supported by the frontier model;
   (v) the modalities of output supported by the frontier model;
   (vi) the intended uses of the frontier model; [and]
   (vii) THE FRONTIER MODEL SPECIFICATION; AND
 S. 10731                            6
 
   (VIII)  any generally applicable restrictions or conditions on uses of
 the frontier model.
   (b)  Before, or concurrently with, deploying a new frontier model or a
 substantially modified version of an existing frontier  model,  a  large
 frontier  developer shall include in the transparency report required by
 paragraph (a) of this subdivision, summaries of all of the following:
   (i) assessments of catastrophic risks OR SECURITY RISKS from the fron-
 tier model conducted pursuant to the large frontier developer's frontier
 AI framework;
   (ii) the results of [the] SUCH assessments [under subparagraph (i)  of
 this paragraph];
   (iii) the extent to which third-party evaluators were involved IN SUCH
 ASSESSMENTS; [and]
   (iv) THE EXTENT TO WHICH SUCH ASSESSMENTS ARE REPRODUCIBLE BY EXTERNAL
 ENTITIES; AND
   (V)  other  steps taken to fulfill the requirements of the frontier AI
 framework with respect to the frontier model.
   (c) A frontier developer that publishes the information  described  in
 paragraph  (a)  or (b) of this subdivision as part of a larger document,
 including a system card or model card, shall  be  deemed  in  compliance
 with the applicable paragraph.
   [4.] 5. (a) (i) A frontier developer shall not make a materially false
 or  misleading  statement  about catastrophic risk OR SECURITY RISK from
 its frontier models or its management of catastrophic risk  OR  SECURITY
 RISK.
   (ii)  A  large frontier developer shall not make a materially false or
 misleading statement about its implementation of,  or  compliance  with,
 its frontier AI framework.
   (III)  A  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER  SHALL  NOT  MAKE  A MATERIALLY FALSE OR
 MISLEADING STATEMENT IN ANY PUBLICATION, SUBMISSION, OR  FILING  TO  THE
 OFFICE UNDER THIS ARTICLE.
   (IV)  A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL DESIGNATE AN ACCOUNTABLE SENIOR
 OFFICER RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THIS  CHAPTER.  THE  ACCOUNTABLE
 SENIOR OFFICER SHALL CERTIFY, AFTER REASONABLE INQUIRY AND UNDER PENALTY
 OF  PERJURY, THAT, TO THE BEST OF THE OFFICER'S KNOWLEDGE, EACH PUBLICA-
 TION AND MATERIAL SUBMISSION TO THE OFFICE IS  ACCURATE,  COMPLETE,  AND
 NOT MATERIALLY MISLEADING.
   (b)  [This subdivision] SUBPARAGRAPHS (I), (II) AND (III) OF PARAGRAPH
 (A) OF THIS SUBDIVISION shall not apply to a statement that was made  in
 good faith and was reasonable under the circumstances.
   [5.]  6.  (A) A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL IMPLEMENT TECHNICAL AND
 ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES THAT ARE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW IT TO  DO  BOTH  OF
 THE FOLLOWING:
   (I) PREVENT AN IDENTIFIED IMMINENT CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENT; AND
   (II) CONTAIN A CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENT AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION FIVE
 OF SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY OF THIS ARTICLE.
   (B)  THIS  SUBDIVISION SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED TO REQUIRE TECHNICAL AND
 ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES SUFFICIENT TO  PREVENT  OR  CONTAIN  A  CRITICAL
 SAFETY  INCIDENT  THAT  ARISES  FROM A COPY OF A FRONTIER MODEL THAT HAS
 BEEN DISTRIBUTED IN AN OPEN SOURCE  RELEASE  AND  THAT  IS  NOT  IN  THE
 POSSESSION OF ITS FRONTIER DEVELOPER.
   7.  (a)  When  a frontier developer publishes documents to comply with
 this section, such frontier developer may make redactions to such  docu-
 ments  that  are  necessary  to  protect such frontier developer's trade
 secrets, such frontier developer's cybersecurity, public safety, or  the
 S. 10731                            7
 
 national  security of the United States or to comply with any federal or
 state law.
   (b) If a frontier developer redacts information in a document pursuant
 to this subdivision, such frontier developer shall:
   (I)  describe the character and justification of such redaction in any
 published version of such  document  to  the  extent  permitted  by  the
 concerns that justify redaction [and shall];
   (II) retain the unredacted information for five years; AND
   (III) GRANT THE OFFICE ACCESS TO AN UNREDACTED COPY OF THE PUBLICATION
 UPON REQUEST.
   §  3. Section 1422 of the general business law, as added by chapter 96
 of the laws of 2026, is renumbered to be section 1423 and a new  section
 1422 is added to read as follows:
   §  1422.  MINIMUM STANDARDS. 1. NO LATER THAN JANUARY FIRST, TWO THOU-
 SAND TWENTY-NINE, THE OFFICE SHALL ADOPT  REGULATIONS,  WHICH  SHALL  BE
 BINDING ON LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPERS, ESTABLISHING MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR
 THE  FRONTIER AI FRAMEWORKS REQUIRED IN SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY-
 ONE OF THIS ARTICLE AS WELL AS  MINIMUM  STANDARDS  FOR  REQUIRED  MITI-
 GATIONS OF CATASTROPHIC RISK AND SECURITY RISK WHICH SHALL ADDRESS:
   (A) EACH ELEMENT REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION ONE OF SECTION
 FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY-ONE OF THIS ARTICLE;
   (B)  EACH  TYPE  OF  CATASTROPHIC RISK ENUMERATED IN THE DEFINITION OF
 CATASTROPHIC RISK IN SUBDIVISION THREE OF SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWEN-
 TY OF THIS ARTICLE;
   (C) SECURITY RISKS; AND
   (D) THE AUTOMATION OF AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
   2. IN IMPLEMENTING THIS SECTION, THE OFFICE SHALL  AIM  TO  PROMULGATE
 REGULATIONS  THAT,  IF  SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED, WOULD COME AS CLOSE AS
 PRACTICABLE TO PREVENTING CATASTROPHIC RISKS AND SECURITY RISKS THAT ARE
 UNREASONABLE IN LIGHT OF THE SOCIETAL BENEFITS OF  THE  ACTIVITIES  THAT
 CREATE THOSE RISKS.
   3.  IN  IMPLEMENTING  THIS SECTION, THE OFFICE SHALL CONSIDER WHETHER,
 GIVEN THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING AI SAFETY  AND  SECURITY,
 THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PROPOSED REGULATION IS SUFFICIENTLY UNDERSTOOD
 TO SUPPORT EFFECTIVE REGULATION, OR WHETHER THE PURPOSES OF THIS ARTICLE
 WOULD  BE  BETTER  SERVED  THROUGH  VOLUNTARY  GUIDANCE,  MONITORING, OR
 FURTHER STUDY.
   4. IN IMPLEMENTING THIS SECTION, THE OFFICE  SHALL  CONSIDER  RELEVANT
 NATIONAL STANDARDS, INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS, AND INDUSTRY CONSENSUS BEST
 PRACTICES,  INCLUDING EXISTING FRONTIER AI FRAMEWORKS PUBLISHED BY FRON-
 TIER DEVELOPERS.
   5. THE OFFICE SHALL CONSULT WITH FRONTIER DEVELOPERS, FRONTIER EXAMIN-
 ERS, AND OTHER TECHNICAL EXPERTS WHEN  CREATING  THE  MINIMUM  STANDARDS
 PRESCRIBED HEREIN.
   §  4. Section 1423 of the general business law, as added by chapter 96
 of the laws of 2026, and as renumbered by section three of this act,  is
 amended to read as follows:
   §  1423.  Reporting.  1.  The office shall establish a mechanism to be
 used by a frontier developer or a member of the public to report a crit-
 ical safety incident that includes all of the following:
   (a) the date of the critical safety incident;
   (b) the reasons the incident qualifies as a critical safety incident;
   (c) a short and plain statement describing the critical  safety  inci-
 dent; [and]
   (d)  whether  the incident was associated with internal use of a fron-
 tier model; AND
 S. 10731                            8
 
   (E) ANY OTHER INFORMATION THE OFFICE  MAY  DEEM  NECESSARY  TO  BETTER
 UNDERSTAND  SUCH  INCIDENT  OR  THE STATE OF CATASTROPHIC RISK, SECURITY
 RISK, AND THE AUTOMATION OF AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
   2.  (a)  A  large  frontier  developer  shall transmit to the office a
 summary of any assessment of:
   (I) catastrophic risk resulting from  internal  use  of  its  frontier
 models  [every  three  months or pursuant to another reasonable schedule
 requested by the large frontier developer, communicated  in  writing  to
 the  office with written updates, as appropriate, and agreed upon by the
 office.];
   (II) THE ABILITY OF ITS FRONTIER MODELS TO AUTOMATE  AI  RESEARCH  AND
 DEVELOPMENT  AND  THEIR  USE IN AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING A
 SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE OF HOW MUCH OF  SUCH  RESEARCH  AND  DEVELOPMENT  IS
 CURRENTLY AUTOMATED;
   (III)  THE  PERCENTAGE  OF  COMPUTING  POWER  USED FOR MODELS THAT ARE
 INTERNALLY USED AND/OR DEPLOYED; AND
   (IV) A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF HOW SUCH  MODELS  ARE  BEING  INTERNALLY
 USED AND/OR DEPLOYED.
   (B) A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL TRANSMIT THE ASSESSMENTS REQUIRED
 UNDER PARAGRAPH (A) OF THIS SUBDIVISION AT ALL OF THE FOLLOWING TIMES:
   (I)  EVERY  THREE  MONTHS  OR  PURSUANT TO ANOTHER REASONABLE SCHEDULE
 REQUESTED BY THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER, COMMUNICATED  IN  WRITING  TO
 THE OFFICE, AND AGREED UPON BY THE OFFICE;
   (II)  WITHIN  SEVENTY-TWO  HOURS  OF  ANY  TIME  THAT THERE HAS BEEN A
 SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER'S  ASSESSMENT  OF
 CATASTROPHIC  RISKS  OR SECURITY RISKS FROM INTERNAL USE OF ITS FRONTIER
 MODELS, OR CAPABILITIES OF ITS FRONTIER MODELS TO AUTOMATE  AI  RESEARCH
 AND  DEVELOPMENT,  IN  COMPARISON TO THE PREVIOUSLY REPORTED ASSESSMENT;
 AND
   (III) AT ANY OTHER TIME THAT THE OFFICE MAY BY REGULATION  REQUIRE  TO
 ENSURE  THE  OFFICE  CAN  ADEQUATELY  MONITOR  THE STATE OF CATASTROPHIC
 RISKS, SECURITY RISKS, THE ABILITY OF FRONTIER  MODELS  TO  AUTOMATE  AI
 RESEARCH  AND  DEVELOPMENT,  AND FRONTIER MODELS' USE IN AI RESEARCH AND
 DEVELOPMENT.
   The office shall establish a mechanism to be used by a large  frontier
 developer  to confidentially submit summaries of any assessments [of the
 potential for catastrophic risk resulting from internal use of its fron-
 tier models] REQUIRED UNDER PARAGRAPH (A) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, PROVIDED,
 HOWEVER, THAT SUCH SUMMARIES SHALL BE SHARED WITH THE ATTORNEY  GENERAL.
 THE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL SHALL BE EMPOWERED TO PURSUE THE ACTIONS PROVIDED
 IN SUBDIVISION TWO OF SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED THIRTY OF THIS ARTICLE AS
 SET FORTH IN SUCH SUBDIVISION.
   [(b)] (C) The office shall take all reasonable  precautions  to  limit
 access  to  any  reports  related to internal use of frontier models [to
 only personnel authorized to know the information] and  to  protect  the
 reports from unauthorized access.
   3.  (a)  [Subject  to paragraph (b) of this subdivision, a] A frontier
 developer shall report any critical safety incident pertaining to one or
 more of its frontier models to the office within seventy-two hours  from
 a  determination  that a critical safety incident has occurred or within
 seventy-two hours of the frontier developer learning facts sufficient to
 establish a reasonable  belief  that  a  critical  safety  incident  has
 occurred.
   (b)  If a frontier developer discovers that a critical safety incident
 poses an imminent risk of death or serious physical injury, the frontier
 developer shall disclose that incident within twenty-four  hours  to  an
 S. 10731                            9

 authority,  including any law enforcement agency or public safety agency
 with jurisdiction, that is appropriate based on the nature of that inci-
 dent and as required by law.
   (c)  A  frontier developer that discovers information about a critical
 safety incident after filing the initial report required by this  subdi-
 vision may file an amended report.
   4. The office shall review:
   (A)  critical safety incident reports submitted by frontier developers
 [and];
   (B) ASSESSMENTS TRANSMITTED BY FRONTIER DEVELOPERS  UNDER  SUBDIVISION
 TWO OF THIS SECTION; AND
   (C)  REPORTS,  NOTIFICATIONS, AND OTHER INFORMATION TRANSMITTED TO THE
 OFFICE BY A FRONTIER EXAMINER PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE.
   THE OFFICE may review reports submitted by members of the public.
   5. (a) The office may transmit reports of critical safety incidents or
 summaries of any assessments [of catastrophic risk from internal use  of
 frontier models] REQUIRED UNDER SUBDIVISION TWO OF THIS SECTION to other
 governmental  entities  at their discretion, considering for example and
 without limitation the following: the severity  of  any  such  incident,
 potential  ongoing  risks, legal or regulatory obligations, the need for
 coordinating with other governmental agencies or other entities and  the
 availability  of  information.  [The  office shall consider transmitting
 such reports or summaries to the office  of  the  attorney  general,  as
 appropriate.]  Any report transmitted from the office to another govern-
 mental entity shall be exempt from disclosure under article six  of  the
 public officers law.
   (b)  The  office may consider, at its discretion, any risks related to
 trade secrets, public safety, cybersecurity of a frontier developer,  or
 national security when transmitting reports.
   6.  A  report  of  a  critical safety incident submitted to the office
 pursuant to this section and a report  of  assessments  of  catastrophic
 risk  from  internal use pursuant to section fourteen hundred twenty-one
 of this article, are exempt from disclosure under  article  six  of  the
 public officers law.
   7. (a) Beginning January first, two thousand twenty-eight, and annual-
 ly  thereafter,  the  office  shall  produce a report, that includes the
 following:
   (i) anonymized and aggregated information about critical safety  inci-
 dents that have been reviewed by the office since the preceding report;
   (ii)  any information that the office deems relevant to frontier model
 safety;
   (iii) recommended updates to this article, if any; and
   (iv) any developments relevant to the purposes of this article.
   (b) The office shall not include information in a report  pursuant  to
 this subdivision that would compromise the trade secrets or cybersecuri-
 ty  of  a frontier developer, public safety, or the national security of
 the United States or that would be prohibited by any  federal  or  state
 law.
   (c) The office shall transmit a report pursuant to this subdivision to
 the governor, the temporary president and minority leader of the senate,
 the  speaker  and minority leader of the assembly, the chair and ranking
 member of the senate committee on internet and technology, and the chair
 and ranking member of the assembly committee on science and technology.
   8. The office may adopt regulations designating one  or  more  federal
 laws,  regulations, or guidance documents that meet all of the following
 conditions for the purposes of subdivision nine of this section:
 S. 10731                           10
 
   (a) (i) the law, regulation, or guidance document  imposes  or  states
 standards  or  requirements  for critical safety incident reporting that
 are substantially equivalent to, or stricter  than,  those  required  by
 subdivision three of this section; and
   (ii)  the  law, regulation, or guidance document described in subpara-
 graph (i) of this paragraph does not need  to  require  critical  safety
 incident reporting to the state of New York; and
   (b)  the  law, regulation, or guidance document is intended to assess,
 detect, or mitigate the catastrophic risk.
   9. (a) A frontier developer that intends to  comply  with  subdivision
 three  of this section by complying with the requirements of, or meeting
 the standards stated by, a federal law, regulation, or guidance document
 designated pursuant to subdivision eight of this section  shall  declare
 its intent to do so to the office.
   (b)  After  a  frontier  developer has declared its intent pursuant to
 paragraph (a) of this subdivision, the following shall apply:
   (i) the frontier developer shall be deemed in compliance with subdivi-
 sion three of this section to the extent  that  the  frontier  developer
 meets  the  standards  of,  or complies with the requirements imposed or
 stated by, the designated federal law, regulation, or guidance  document
 until  the  frontier developer declares the revocation of that intent to
 the office or the office  revokes  a  relevant  regulation  pursuant  to
 subdivision ten of this section;
   (ii)  the failure by a frontier developer to meet the standards of, or
 comply with the requirements stated by, the federal law, regulation,  or
 guidance  document  designated  pursuant  to  subdivision  eight of this
 section shall constitute a violation of this article; and
   (iii) frontier developers who comply with subdivision  three  of  this
 section by meeting such federal standards shall send copies of any crit-
 ical  safety  incident reports required by such federal standards to the
 office concurrently with sending them to federal authorities.
   10. The office shall revoke a  regulation  adopted  under  subdivision
 eight  of  this section if the requirements of subdivision eight of this
 section are no longer met.
   § 5. Sections 1423, 1424, 1425, 1426,  1427,  1428  and  1429  of  the
 general  business  law,  as  added by chapter 96 of the laws of 2026 are
 renumbered sections 1427, 1428, 1429, 1430, 1431, 1432 and 1433, respec-
 tively, and three new sections 1424, 1425 and 1426 are added to read  as
 follows:
   §  1424. FRONTIER EXAMINERS. 1. (A) NO LATER THAN SIXTY DAYS AFTER THE
 EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ARTICLE OR SIXTY DAYS AFTER THE DATE ON  WHICH  A
 PERSON  FIRST  QUALIFIES  AS  A  LARGE  FRONTIER DEVELOPER, WHICHEVER IS
 LATER, AND THEREAFTER ON AN ANNUAL BASIS,  A  LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER
 SHALL  RETAIN A FRONTIER EXAMINER TO PRODUCE A REPORT WHICH ASSESSES THE
 FOLLOWING:
   (I) WHETHER A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER HAS COMPLIED WITH ITS  FRONTIER
 AI  FRAMEWORK AS WELL AS ANY INSTANCES OF NONCOMPLIANCE WITH SUCH FRAME-
 WORK;
   (II) WHETHER SUCH AI FRAMEWORK MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL DETAIL IN  ORDER
 TO BETTER ASSESS SUCH COMPLIANCE; AND
   (III)  WHETHER  ANY STATEMENTS MADE BY THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER TO
 THE PUBLIC, OFFICE, ATTORNEY GENERAL,  OR  OTHER  GOVERNMENTAL  ENTITIES
 REGARDING CATASTROPHIC RISKS OR SECURITY RISKS, SUCH DEVELOPER'S MANAGE-
 MENT OF SUCH RISKS, AND/OR SUCH DEVELOPER'S COMPLIANCE WITH ITS FRONTIER
 AI  FRAMEWORK ARE INCONSISTENT WITH THE FINDINGS OF THE FRONTIER EXAMIN-
 ER'S REPORT.
 S. 10731                           11
 
   (B) A FRONTIER EXAMINER SHALL TRANSMIT AN UNREDACTED  VERSION  OF  THE
 FINAL REPORT TO THE OFFICE AND THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER WITHIN SEVEN
 DAYS  OF COMPLETING SUCH REPORT; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, THAT SUCH UNREDACTED
 REPORT SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER ARTICLE SIX OF  THE  PUBLIC
 OFFICERS LAW.
   (C)  NO  LESS THAN TWENTY-ONE DAYS AFTER TRANSMITTING THE FINAL REPORT
 UNDER PARAGRAPH (B) OF THIS SUBDIVISION,  THE  FRONTIER  EXAMINER  SHALL
 CONSPICUOUSLY   PUBLISH  SUCH  REPORT  WITH  APPROPRIATE  REDACTIONS  AS
 PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH (E) OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
   (D) WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF  A  FRONTIER  EXAMINER  PUBLISHING  A  REPORT
 PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (C) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVEL-
 OPER  SHALL CONSPICUOUSLY PUBLISH A LINK TO SUCH REPORT ON SUCH DEVELOP-
 ER'S PUBLIC WEBSITE.
   (E) ANY PUBLIC VERSION OF A  FRONTIER  EXAMINER'S  REPORT  UNDER  THIS
 SUBDIVISION  MAY  CONTAIN  REDACTIONS TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO PROTECT
 THE FRONTIER EXAMINER OR LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S TRADE  SECRETS,  THE
 FRONTIER  EXAMINER'S OR FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S CYBERSECURITY, PUBLIC SAFE-
 TY, OR THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES, OR TO COMPLY WITH ANY
 FEDERAL OR STATE LAW.
   2. (A) ON OR BEFORE JANUARY FIRST, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-EIGHT, A  LARGE
 FRONTIER  DEVELOPER SHALL RETAIN A FRONTIER EXAMINER TO PERFORM ONGOING,
 CONTINUOUS ASSESSMENT OF THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER FOR  THE  PURPOSES
 OF PRODUCING THE OUTPUTS REQUIRED BY THIS SUBDIVISION.
   (B)  ON  OR  BEFORE  APRIL FIRST, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-EIGHT, AND EVERY
 NINETY DAYS THEREAFTER, A FRONTIER EXAMINER RETAINED BY A  LARGER  FRON-
 TIER  DEVELOPER  UNDER  THIS  SUBDIVISION  SHALL  PRODUCE  A REPORT THAT
 INCLUDES:
   (I) AN ASSESSMENT OF EACH TYPE OF CATASTROPHIC RISK POSED BY THE LARGE
 FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S FRONTIER MODELS, TAKING INTO ACCOUNT MODEL CAPABIL-
 ITIES, APPLICABLE THREAT MODELS,  AND  THE  LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER'S
 MITIGATIONS;
   (II)  AN  ASSESSMENT  OF  SECURITY RISKS RELATED TO THE LARGE FRONTIER
 DEVELOPER'S FRONTIER MODEL;
   (III) AN ASSESSMENT OF THE ABILITY OF THE LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER'S
 FRONTIER  MODELS TO AUTOMATE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH AND DEVEL-
 OPMENT AND ANY INCREASED POTENTIAL FOR CATASTROPHIC RISKS OR  CHALLENGES
 TO  RISK MONITORING, ASSESSMENT OR MITIGATION RESULTING FROM SUCH ABILI-
 TY;
   (IV) AN ASSESSMENT OF WHETHER THE LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER'S  ACTIV-
 ITIES  WOULD POSE A SUBSTANTIAL LEVEL OF CATASTROPHIC RISK OVER THE NEXT
 NINETY DAY PERIOD, IF ADDITIONAL MITIGATIONS WERE NOT PUT IN PLACE; AND
   (V) RECOMMENDED MITIGATIONS, IF ANY, THAT WOULD REDUCE  THE  LEVEL  OF
 CATASTROPHIC RISK.
   (C)  A  FRONTIER  EXAMINER SHALL FURTHER INCLUDE IN AN APPENDIX TO THE
 REPORT DESCRIBED IN THIS SUBDIVISION:
   (I) A LIST OF THE PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN THE REPORT AND  THE  PROCESSES
 INVOLVED IN CREATING SUCH REPORT;
   (II)  THE  FRONTIER  EXAMINER'S  PROCEDURES  FOR MANAGING CONFLICTS OF
 INTEREST AND  ANY  SPECIFIC  CONFLICTS  OF  INTEREST  OF  ANY  PERSONNEL
 INVOLVED IN THE REPORT;
   (III)  THE  METHODOLOGY  OF THE PROCESS USED TO PRODUCE THE REPORT AND
 THE NATURE OF THE INFORMATION  REVIEWED  BY  THE  FRONTIER  EXAMINER  TO
 PRODUCE THE REPORT; AND
   (IV)  THE SIGNATURE OF THE LEAD EXAMINER CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF THE
 REPORT.
 S. 10731                           12
 
   (D) A FRONTIER EXAMINER SHALL TRANSMIT AN UNREDACTED  VERSION  OF  THE
 FINAL  REPORT  AND  ITS  APPENDIX  TO  THE OFFICE AND THE LARGE FRONTIER
 DEVELOPER WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF COMPLETING SUCH REPORT, PROVIDED,  HOWEV-
 ER,  THAT  SUCH  UNREDACTED REPORT SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER
 ARTICLE SIX OF THE PUBLIC OFFICERS LAW.
   (E)  NO  LESS THAN TWENTY-ONE DAYS AFTER TRANSMITTING THE FINAL REPORT
 UNDER PARAGRAPH (D) OF THIS SUBDIVISION,  THE  FRONTIER  EXAMINER  SHALL
 CONSPICUOUSLY   PUBLISH  SUCH  REPORT  WITH  APPROPRIATE  REDACTIONS  AS
 PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH (G) OF THIS SUBDIVISION.
   (F) WITHIN SEVEN DAYS OF  A  FRONTIER  EXAMINER  PUBLISHING  A  REPORT
 PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (E) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVEL-
 OPER  SHALL CONSPICUOUSLY PUBLISH A LINK TO SUCH REPORT ON SUCH DEVELOP-
 ER'S PUBLIC WEBSITE.
   (G) ANY PUBLIC VERSION OF A  FRONTIER  EXAMINER'S  REPORT  UNDER  THIS
 SUBDIVISION  MAY  CONTAIN  REDACTIONS TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO PROTECT
 THE FRONTIER EXAMINER OR LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S TRADE  SECRETS,  THE
 FRONTIER  EXAMINER'S OR FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S CYBERSECURITY, PUBLIC SAFE-
 TY, OR THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES, OR TO COMPLY WITH ANY
 FEDERAL OR STATE LAW.
   (H) IF A REDACTION IS MADE PURSUANT TO THIS  SUBDIVISION,  THE  PERSON
 MAKING  OR  REQUESTING  THE  REDACTION SHALL PROVIDE A WRITTEN STATEMENT
 WITH THE CHARACTER AND JUSTIFICATION OF THE REDACTION THAT  IS  INCLUDED
 IN  ANY PUBLISHED VERSION OF THE DOCUMENT TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY THE
 CONCERNS THAT JUSTIFY REDACTION, AND SHALL RETAIN THE UNREDACTED  INFOR-
 MATION FOR FIVE YEARS.
   (I)  IF A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER REQUESTS A REDACTION AND A FRONTIER
 EXAMINER BELIEVES THAT SUCH REDACTION DOES NOT COMPLY WITH PARAGRAPH (G)
 OF THIS SUBDIVISION, THE FRONTIER EXAMINER SHALL NOTIFY  THE  OFFICE  IN
 WRITING  WITHIN  FOURTEEN DAYS OF PUBLISHING THE EXAMINER'S REPORT. UPON
 RECEIPT OF SUCH NOTIFICATION OR UPON THE OFFICE'S OWN DETERMINATION THAT
 A REDACTION IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THIS SUBDIVISION THE OFFICE SHALL:
   (I) NOTIFY THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER AND PROVIDE THE LARGE FRONTIER
 DEVELOPER AT LEAST TEN DAYS TO SUBMIT A WRITTEN JUSTIFICATION  FOR  SUCH
 REDACTION; AND
   (II)  WITHIN  FIFTEEN  DAYS  OF  RECEIVING SUCH JUSTIFICATION FROM THE
 DEVELOPER, DETERMINE IN WRITING WHETHER  SUCH  REDACTION  COMPLIES  WITH
 PARAGRAPH  (G)  OF  THIS SUBDIVISION AND PROVIDE A COPY OF SUCH DETERMI-
 NATION TO THE FRONTIER EXAMINER AND LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER.
   (J) IF THE OFFICE DETERMINES PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (I) OF THIS  SUBDI-
 VISION  THAT  REDACTION  IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH (G) OF THIS
 SUBDIVISION, THE FRONTIER EXAMINER SHALL PUBLISH ITS REPORT AND APPENDIX
 WITHOUT SUCH REDACTION WITHIN TEN DAYS OF SUCH OFFICE'S WRITTEN DETERMI-
 NATION.
   (K) A LARGE FRONTIER  DEVELOPER  SHALL  GRANT  ITS  FRONTIER  EXAMINER
 ACCESS  TO  ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION AS DEFINED IN SUBDIVISION TWENTY OF
 SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED TWENTY OF THIS ARTICLE.
   (L) TO PROTECT A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S TRADE  SECRETS,  CONFIDEN-
 TIAL  BUSINESS  INFORMATION,  CYBERSECURITY,  NATIONAL  SECURITY  OF THE
 UNITED STATES, OR PUBLIC SAFETY, A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER  MAY  IMPOSE
 REASONABLE  SECURITY  PROTOCOLS ON THE FRONTIER EXAMINER, INCLUDING, BUT
 NOT LIMITED TO RESTRICTIONS  ON  NOTE  TAKING,  COPYING,  RETAINING,  OR
 REMOVING  MATERIALS,  REQUIREMENTS  FOR ON-PREMISE REVIEW, AND CONFIDEN-
 TIALITY REQUIREMENTS.
   (M) NOTWITHSTANDING PARAGRAPH (L) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, A  LARGE  FRON-
 TIER DEVELOPER SHALL NOT IMPOSE SECURITY PROTOCOLS ON THE FRONTIER EXAM-
 INER  THAT  WOULD PREVENT THE FRONTIER EXAMINER FROM REASONABLY CARRYING
 S. 10731                           13
 
 OUT ITS RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THIS SECTION,  AND  A  FRONTIER  EXAMINER
 WHICH  BELIEVES  SUCH  SECURITY PROTOCOLS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED SHALL NOTIFY
 THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER AND THE OFFICE IN WRITING.
   (N)  UPON  RECEIPT OF A NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH (M) OF THIS
 SUBDIVISION, THE OFFICE SHALL:
   (I) PROVIDE THE DEVELOPER AT LEAST TEN DAYS TO EITHER SUBMIT A WRITTEN
 JUSTIFICATION FOR WITHHOLDING ACCESS OR INFORMATION  FROM  THE  FRONTIER
 EXAMINER, OR TO PROVIDE SUCH ACCESS OR INFORMATION;
   (II) DETERMINE WITHIN TEN DAYS OF RECEIVING THE INFORMATION IN SUBPAR-
 AGRAPH  (I)  OF THIS PARAGRAPH WHETHER INFORMATION OR ACCESS IS REQUIRED
 TO BE PROVIDED BY THE DEVELOPER UNDER THIS SECTION; AND
   (III) IF THE OFFICE DETERMINES THAT SUCH INFORMATION OR ACCESS  IS  SO
 REQUIRED,  PROVIDE  WRITTEN NOTICE OF SUCH DETERMINATION TO THE FRONTIER
 EXAMINER AND LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER.
   (O) THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL  PROVIDE  SUCH  INFORMATION  OR
 ACCESS REQUIRED UNDER SUBPARAGRAPH (III) OF PARAGRAPH (N) OF THIS SUBDI-
 VISION  TO  THE FRONTIER EXAMINER WITHIN TEN DAYS OF RECEIVING NOTICE OF
 SUCH REQUIREMENT FROM THE OFFICE.
   (P) A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL RETAIN FOR FIVE YEARS EACH  DOCU-
 MENT CREATED, PUBLISHED, OR SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE ALONGSIDE
 RECORDS SUFFICIENT TO PERMIT A FRONTIER EXAMINER TO VERIFY: THE DEVELOP-
 ER'S ASSESSMENTS OF FRONTIER MODELS; THE DEVELOPER'S DECISIONS TO DEPLOY
 OR  USE FRONTIER MODELS, AND THE DEVELOPER'S HANDLING OF CRITICAL SAFETY
 INCIDENTS. UPON WRITTEN REQUEST BY THE FRONTIER EXAMINER OR THE  OFFICE,
 A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL PRESERVE ALL RELEVANT INFORMATION IDEN-
 TIFIED IN SUCH REQUEST FOR FIVE YEARS.
   3. (A) ANY ENTITY THAT SEEKS TO PERFORM THE DUTIES OF A FRONTIER EXAM-
 INER UNDER THIS ARTICLE SHALL:
   (I)  EMPLOY  OR RETAIN PERSONNEL FOR ITS DUTIES AS A FRONTIER EXAMINER
 WHO HAVE TECHNICAL EXPERTISE IN CATASTROPHIC RISKS, SECURITY RISKS,  AND
 THE AUTOMATION OF AI RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT;
   (II)  HAVE AND IMPLEMENT POLICIES TO MANAGE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST THAT
 COULD IMPAIR THE INDEPENDENCE OR INTEGRITY OF THE EXAMINER'S WORK; AND
   (III) NOT HAVE FINANCIAL, OPERATIONAL, OR MANAGERIAL DEPENDENCE ON ANY
 LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER OR AFFILIATE OF  A  LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER;
 PROVIDED,  HOWEVER,  THAT REASONABLE COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES PERFORMED
 AS A FRONTIER EXAMINER PURSUANT TO THIS  ARTICLE  SHALL  NOT  CONSTITUTE
 FINANCIAL  DEPENDENCE  FOR  PURPOSES OF THIS SUBPARAGRAPH IF THE COMPEN-
 SATION IS NOT CONTINGENT ON THE  CONTENT  OF  ANY  REPORT,  FINDING,  OR
 RECOMMENDATION OF THE FRONTIER EXAMINER.
   (B)  BEGINNING  JANUARY FIRST, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-NINE, ONLY ENTITIES
 LICENSED AS A FRONTIER EXAMINER UNDER SUBDIVISION FOUR OF  THIS  SECTION
 SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF A FRONTIER EXAMINER UNDER THIS ARTICLE.
   4.  (A)  NO  LATER  THAN  JANUARY FIRST TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-EIGHT, THE
 OFFICE SHALL ADOPT REGULATIONS ESTABLISHING A PROCEDURE FOR THE  LICENS-
 ING  OF FRONTIER EXAMINERS WHO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF PARAGRAPH (A) OF
 SUBDIVISION THREE OF THIS SECTION AND ANY OTHER REQUIREMENTS THE  OFFICE
 DETERMINES WOULD FURTHER THE PURPOSES OF THIS ARTICLE.
   (B) SUCH REGULATIONS SHALL DETAIL THE PROCEDURE BY WHICH AN ENTITY MAY
 APPLY  TO  BE A FRONTIER DEVELOPER AND THE PROCEDURE BY WHICH THE OFFICE
 SHALL APPROVE OR DENY SUCH APPLICATION WITHIN NINETY DAYS.
   (C) THE REGULATIONS SHALL DETAIL CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH AND THE PROCE-
 DURE BY WHICH THE OFFICE SHALL REVOKE THE LICENSE OF A FRONTIER DEVELOP-
 ER.
   (D)  THE  REGULATIONS  SHALL  ENSURE  THE  INTEGRITY  OF  EXAMINATIONS
 CONDUCTED BY LICENSED EXAMINERS BY:
 S. 10731                           14
 
   (I)  INCLUDING CONFLICT OF INTEREST RULES FOR A FRONTIER EXAMINER, ITS
 EMPLOYEES, AND ITS CONTRACTORS; AND
   (II)  INCLUDING  DATA SECURITY AND HANDLING RULES FOR FRONTIER EXAMIN-
 ERS.
   (E) THE OFFICE MAY IN ITS DISCRETION REQUIRE A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOP-
 ER TO RETAIN AN ADDITIONAL SPECIFIED FRONTIER EXAMINER:
   (I) IN CASES WHERE A CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENT HAS BEEN REPORTED TO THE
 OFFICE AND A FRONTIER EXAMINER IS NEEDED TO   INVESTIGATE SUCH  CRITICAL
 SAFETY INCIDENT; AND/OR
   (II) IN CASES WHERE THE OFFICE FINDS THAT A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S
 ORIGINAL FRONTIER EXAMINER HAS NOT PERFORMED ITS DUTIES IN A MANNER THAT
 PERMITS  THE  OFFICE  TO  HAVE SATISFACTORY VISIBILITY INTO THE LEVEL OF
 CATASTROPHIC RISK AND SECURITY RISK POSED BY THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOP-
 ER'S ACTIVITIES.
   (F) WHEN REQUIRING A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER TO RETAIN AN  ADDITIONAL
 FRONTIER  DEVELOPER  UNDER PARAGRAPH (E) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, THE OFFICE
 SHALL DESCRIBE IN DETAIL THE IDENTITY OF THE DESIGNATED ADDITIONAL FRON-
 TIER EXAMINER, THE REASONS FOR SUCH DESIGNATION, THE FORM AND TIMING  OF
 REPORTS  THAT THE ADDITIONAL FRONTIER EXAMINER IS EXPECTED TO PRODUCE IN
 THE EVENT OF A CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENT INVESTIGATION, AND THE  DURATION
 OF SUCH ADDITIONAL EXAMINATION, WHICH SHALL EXPIRE AFTER ONE YEAR ABSENT
 REDESIGNATION BY THE OFFICE.
   5. A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL NOT RETAIN AN ENTITY AS A FRONTIER
 EXAMINER  IF  THE ENTITY IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO BE A FRONTIER EXAMINER UNDER
 THIS SECTION. BEGINNING JANUARY FIRST, TWO THOUSAND TWENTY-NINE, A LARGE
 FRONTIER DEVELOPER MAY ONLY RETAIN ENTITIES LICENSED AS FRONTIER EXAMIN-
 ERS UNDER SUBDIVISION FOUR OF THIS SECTION.
   6. NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL AUTHORIZE THE IMPOSITION OF  A  CIVIL
 PENALTY  SOLELY  FOR  A  LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER'S FAILURE TO ADOPT A
 RECOMMENDATION OF A FRONTIER EXAMINER WHERE NO COURT ORDER REQUIRING THE
 RECOMMENDED ACTION HAS BEEN ISSUED IN  AN  ACTION  BROUGHT  PURSUANT  TO
 SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED THIRTY-ONE OF THIS ARTICLE.
   7.  (A)  IF, AT ANY TIME, A FRONTIER EXAMINER BELIEVES THAT THERE IS A
 COVERED EMERGENCY RELATED TO A LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER'S  ACTIVITIES,
 THE FRONTIER EXAMINER SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT TO THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVEL-
 OPER,  THE  OFFICE, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AS SOON AS PRACTICABLE, BUT
 NO LATER THAN SEVENTY-TWO HOURS AFTER FORMING SUCH BELIEF.
   (B) THE FRONTIER EXAMINER SHALL ALSO SUBMIT A  REPORT  CONTAINING  THE
 MATTERS  REQUIRED  BY  THIS SUBDIVISION TO THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER,
 THE OFFICE, AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WITHIN SEVENTY-TWO HOURS AFTER  THE
 ATTORNEY GENERAL OR THE OFFICE REQUESTS SUCH A REPORT IN CONNECTION WITH
 AN  ACTION  BROUGHT  OR UNDER CONSIDERATION PURSUANT TO SECTION FOURTEEN
 HUNDRED THIRTY-ONE OF THIS ARTICLE, WHETHER OR NOT THE FRONTIER EXAMINER
 HAS INDEPENDENTLY FORMED THE BELIEF DESCRIBED IN PARAGRAPH (A)  OF  THIS
 SUBDIVISION.
   (C)  A  REPORT UNDER THIS SUBDIVISION SHALL STATE THE FRONTIER EXAMIN-
 ER'S ASSESSMENT OF WHETHER THERE IS A COVERED EMERGENCY, THE FACTUAL AND
 TECHNICAL BASIS FOR THAT ASSESSMENT, ANY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ACTIONS THE
 LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER COULD TAKE TO PREVENT  OR  MATERIALLY  MITIGATE
 THE COVERED EMERGENCY, AND ANY MATERIAL INFORMATION THE FRONTIER EXAMIN-
 ER WAS UNABLE TO OBTAIN.
   §  1425. COMPUTING POWER LIMITATIONS. 1. THE OFFICE SHALL BE EMPOWERED
 TO ADOPT REGULATIONS PRESCRIBING THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH, AND  THE
 PROCEDURE  BY  WHICH,  IT MAY ORDER THAT LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPERS LIMIT
 COMPUTING POWER AS DESCRIBED IN THIS SECTION. SUCH ORDER SHALL APPLY  TO
 ALL  LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPERS SIMULTANEOUSLY, PROVIDED HOWEVER THAT THE
 S. 10731                           15
 
 OFFICE SHALL RETAIN THE DISCRETION TO  ORDER  DIFFERENT  LIMITATIONS  OF
 COMPUTING  POWER PER LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER AS THE OFFICE DEEMS NECES-
 SARY AND IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE OBJECTIVE OF SUBDIVISION  TWO  OF  THIS
 SECTION.
   2. SUCH ORDER MAY ONLY BE ISSUED IN ORDER TO REDUCE CATASTROPHIC RISK,
 PREVENT  A  CRITICAL SAFETY INCIDENT, OR AVERT A COVERED EMERGENCY. SUCH
 ORDER MAY BE INFORMED BY REPORTS OR ASSESSMENTS SUBMITTED  OR  PUBLISHED
 UNDER THIS ARTICLE OR BY INFORMATION OTHERWISE AVAILABLE TO THE OFFICE.
   3.  SUCH  ORDER  MAY LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF COMPUTING POWER USED TO TRAIN
 NEW MODELS OF A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER AND/OR THE AMOUNT OF  COMPUTING
 POWER DEDICATED TO AUTOMATED RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT.
   4. THE OFFICE SHALL RETAIN A FRONTIER EXAMINER AS DESCRIBED IN SECTION
 FOURTEEN  HUNDRED  TWENTY-FOUR OF THIS ARTICLE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH
 SUCH ORDER.
   § 1426. WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS. 1. A LARGE FRONTIER  DEVELOPER  WHO
 IS  AN EMPLOYER SHALL BE BOUND BY ALL OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION SEVEN
 HUNDRED FORTY OF THE LABOR LAW.
   2. A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL NOT MAKE, ADOPT, ENFORCE, OR ENTER
 INTO ANY RULE, REGULATION, POLICY, OR CONTRACT THAT PREVENTS AN EMPLOYEE
 FROM ENGAGING IN ANY OF THE PROTECTED ACTIVITIES PROVIDED  IN  PARAGRAPH
 (A), (B) OR (C) OF SUBDIVISION TWO OF SECTION SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY OF THE
 LABOR LAW.
   3.  AN EMPLOYEE MAY USE THE WEBSITE CREATED UNDER SUBDIVISION THREE OF
 SECTION FOURTEEN HUNDRED THIRTY-ONE OF  THIS  ARTICLE  TO  DISCLOSE  ANY
 ACTIVITY UNDER THIS SECTION.
   4.  (A) IN ADDITION TO THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS PROVIDED IN SUBDIVISION
 EIGHT OF SECTION SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY OF THE LABOR LAW, A LARGE  FRONTIER
 DEVELOPER  SHALL ENSURE THAT ANY NEW EMPLOYEES RECEIVE EQUIVALENT NOTICE
 OF SUCH EMPLOYEE'S  PROTECTIONS,  RIGHTS,  AND  OBLIGATIONS  UNDER  SUCH
 SECTION  WITHIN  TEN DAYS OF THE INITIAL DATE OF SUCH EMPLOYEE'S EMPLOY-
 MENT.
   (B) A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL ENSURE THAT  EMPLOYEES  WHO  WORK
 REMOTELY  RECEIVE  EQUIVALENT  NOTICE  OF THEIR PROTECTIONS, RIGHTS, AND
 OBLIGATIONS UNDER SECTION SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY OF THE LABOR LAW.
   (C) A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL PROVIDE WRITTEN  NOTICE  TO  EACH
 COVERED  EMPLOYEE  OF SUCH EMPLOYEE'S RIGHTS UNDER SECTION SEVEN HUNDRED
 FORTY OF THE LABOR LAW AND UNDER THIS SECTION AT LEAST ONCE EACH YEAR. A
 LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER SHALL ENSURE THAT THE NOTICE  IS  RECEIVED  AND
 ACKNOWLEDGED BY ALL EMPLOYEES.
   §  6. Section 1431 of the general business law, as added by chapter 96
 of the laws of 2026 and as renumbered by section five of  this  act,  is
 amended to read as follows:
   §  1431.  Violations. 1. The attorney general may bring a civil action
 to recover a civil penalty in  an  amount  not  to  exceed  one  million
 dollars  [for  a  first violation] PER DAY THAT A FIRST VIOLATION OCCURS
 and in an amount not to exceed three  million  dollars  per  [subsequent
 violation, determined based on the severity of the violation] DAY THAT A
 SUBSEQUENT  VIOLATION  OCCURS  where a large frontier developer fails to
 [publish or transmit a compliant document required to  be  published  or
 transmitted under this article, makes a statement in violation of subdi-
 vision  four  of  section  fourteen  hundred twenty-one of this article,
 fails to report an incident as  required  by  section  fourteen  hundred
 twenty-two  of this article, or fails to comply with its own frontier AI
 framework] COMPLY WITH THIS CHAPTER, A REGULATION  ADOPTED  PURSUANT  TO
 THIS ARTICLE, OR A COURT ORDER ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION.
 S. 10731                           16
 
   2.  (A) THE ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY FURTHER BRING AN ACTION IN A COURT OF
 COMPETENT JURISDICTION FOR  INJUNCTIVE  RELIEF,  INCLUDING  A  TEMPORARY
 RESTRAINING ORDER, AGAINST A LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER WHERE:
   (I)  THE  LARGE  FRONTIER  DEVELOPER VIOLATES THIS ARTICLE OR FAILS TO
 COMPLY WITH A REGULATION ADOPTED PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE;
   (II) A FRONTIER EXAMINER REPORTS  PURSUANT  TO  SUBDIVISION  SEVEN  OF
 SECTION  FOURTEEN  HUNDRED  TWENTY-FOUR  OF THIS ARTICLE THAT THERE IS A
 COVERED EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE LARGE FRONTIER DEVELOPER'S  ACTIVITIES;
 OR
   (III)  THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OTHERWISE HAS REASON TO BELIEVE, INCLUDING
 ON THE BASIS OF A REPORT OR ASSESSMENT SUBMITTED OR PUBLISHED UNDER THIS
 ARTICLE, THAT THERE IS A COVERED EMERGENCY RELATED TO THE LARGE FRONTIER
 DEVELOPER'S ACTIVITIES.
   (B) IN AN ACTION UNDER THIS SECTION, THE COURT MAY  ORDER  ANY  RELIEF
 REASONABLY NECESSARY TO PREVENT OR MATERIALLY MITIGATE THE COVERED EMER-
 GENCY  OR REMEDY THE VIOLATION, INCLUDING CORRECTIVE ACTIONS, THE CESSA-
 TION OF ANY ACTIVITY, AND/OR AN ORDER RESTRICTING THE  DEPLOYMENT,  USE,
 OR  AVAILABILITY  OF  A  MODEL WITHIN THE STATE. THE COURT MAY MODIFY OR
 DISSOLVE AN ORDER AS CIRCUMSTANCES CHANGE.
   (C) THE COURT SHALL PRESERVE THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION EXEMPT
 FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER THIS ARTICLE AND/OR REDACTED UNDER THIS ARTICLE BY
 REASONABLE MEANS, INCLUDING BY SEALING PORTIONS  OF  THE  RECORD,  WHILE
 MAKING ITS DECISION AND THE BASIS FOR THE DECISION PUBLIC TO THE MAXIMUM
 EXTENT CONSISTENT WITH THAT PROTECTION.
   (D) THE OFFICE SHALL PROMPTLY REFER TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ANY INFOR-
 MATION  INDICATING  A  VIOLATION OF THIS CHAPTER OR A COVERED EMERGENCY,
 SHALL PROVIDE TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL ON REQUEST ANY RECORD SUBMITTED TO
 THE OFFICE UNDER THIS ARTICLE, AND SHALL PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE IN
 AN ACTION UNDER THIS SECTION AT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S REQUEST.
   3.  THE  ATTORNEY  GENERAL  SHALL  MAINTAIN  A  WEBSITE   TO   RECEIVE
 COMPLAINTS,  INFORMATION,  AND/OR  REFERRALS  FROM  PERSONS REGARDING AN
 OPERATOR'S OR COVERED   PLATFORM'S ALLEGED COMPLIANCE  OR  NONCOMPLIANCE
 WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE.
   4.  Nothing in this article shall be construed to establish, authorize
 or create a private right of action associated with violations  of  this
 article.
   [3.]  5. Nothing in this article shall be construed to prevent a large
 frontier developer  from  asserting  that  another  person,  entity,  or
 factor,  may  be  responsible  for  any  alleged  harm, injury or damage
 resulting from a catastrophic risk or critical safety incident.
   § 7. Severability.  If any clause, sentence,  paragraph,  subdivision,
 section or part of this act shall be adjudged by any court of  competent
 jurisdiction  to  be invalid, such judgment shall not affect, impair, or
 invalidate the remainder thereof, but shall be confined in its operation
 to the clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or part there-
 of  directly  involved  in  the controversy in which such judgment shall
 have been made.
   § 8. This act shall take effect on the on the same  date  and  in  the
 same manner as chapter 699 of the laws of 2025, takes effect.